Orange Julius Gives Away The Game

House Speaker John Boehner expects the GOP to not only maintain control of the House in 2012, but to keep a majority in that chamber for another decade.  How does he expect to do it?  The power of playing the incumbency game during redistricting.

“I think it will be nearly impossible” for Democrats to win back the House in November, Boehner said. “I think our freshman members are doing a good job preparing themselves for the upcoming election. I would also note that redistricting across the country has helped those freshman members and others in tough seats who will now have better seats. So I think we’re in pretty strong shape for the year ahead.”

He brings up a good point.  Redistricting is the key to controlling the House, and the GOP had an enormous advantage in controlling state redistricting processes in 2010.  But should he be bragging about it?  Steve Benen rightfully thinks Congress's single-digit approval rating is going to be far more indicative.

For the record, Boehner’s confidence may well be misplaced. If Democrats pick up 25 seats in November, Boehner will have to hand his Speaker’s gavel back to Nancy Pelosi. Given that Congress’ approval rating has reached depths unseen since the dawn of modern polling, it’s not unreasonable to think we’ll see some electoral volatility later this year.

For that matter, several recent polls show Democrats doing quite well on the congressional generic ballot, including a National Journal poll released yesterday that showed Dems with an 11-point lead on which party Americans want to see in control of the House.

And while we’re at it, both the former chairman of the Republican National Committee and the former chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee believe a Dem majority is in reach this year.

I think it's more than just "in reach", especially if President Obama is able to inspire voters like he did in 2008.  His coattails were long then.  I think they'll be as long or better now.

Epic Fail: Taco, Anyone?

After a federal indictment regarding treatment of Latino abuse, the police chief has decided to make things even worse.  After having an opportunity to say anything, even the usual recycled crap (we are investigating, we take this very seriously, blah blah) he instead lets the people know how they really feel, and why the feds were most likely on the right track.

Chief Gallo was not charged, but was referred to in the indictment as “Co-Conspirator No. 1,” who, it said, tried to thwart investigations of his officers and tried to have a priest who protested their behavior removed from his parish.

But on Wednesday it was Mr. Maturo facing the most immediate criticism, as he quickly backpedaled from comments he made to a WPIX (Channel 11) reporter Tuesday.

Asked what he was doing for the Latino community in light of the indictments and accusation of harassment, illegal searches and seizures and assaults on Latinos, Mr. Maturo responded on camera: “I might have tacos when I go home. I’m not sure yet.”

Facing a blizzard of criticism — Gov. Dannel P. Malloy called his comments “repugnant” and said they represented “either a horrible lack of judgment or worse” — Mr. Maturo apologized, at first grudgingly and then with a long statement offering his “sincerest apologies” for what he called an “insensitive and off-collar comment.”

His apology is lame, and too late.  He didn't accidentally say this, he flew off the handle and exposed the ugliness that lies beneath.  Since this story broke, several things have come forth.  As is the nature of breaking news, some are accurate and some are not.  However, among all the rumors some surely must be true, and others contain a kernel of truth.  That's enough for us to call for change.  Crime is crime, and police have a difficult job.  Skin color, material wealth and intelligence are not measures of criminal nature.  Our law enforcement must know this, acknowledge it and demonstrate it.  Epic fail on all counts.

Calling BS On Ourselves

The snippet below is quoting an awesome article that refers to an awesome quote.  It also echoes something I've really been thinking about lately, but they were far more eloquent and concise.  Still, I want to lay the groundwork for some themes and ideas that will reappear.  We cannot afford to bullshit ourselves, and yet we all do a terrific job of just that.

We are our own best friends.  When it comes down to it, nobody has our interests and benefits in mind quite like how we look out for ourselves.  Yet we do it so wrong.  We lie to ourselves, and like parents who raise spoiled children, we do ourselves a disservice.  We act in direct opposition to what we know is good for us, and justify it with a permissive mental wave of the hand.  Some folks are self-destructive, some truly sell themselves that what they want is the right answer no matter what, some don't think at all but follow some whispering instinct that somehow turns into a compulsion.  It's human to do so, but it's the human challenge to make the most of ourselves, so we can make the most of our lives.  So we are also our own worst enemies, not as a choice but as a byproduct of our actions.

This is something all people do, regardless of age, period in history, culture or religion.  It may be the one thing that truly ties all human beings together.  Nobody is perfect all the time, but we are challenged to fight to be our best, not be content to wallow in our weakness. How many thousands, or even millions of things could we prevent simply by being good friends to ourselves and refusing to allow those lies to root and take hold?

The article is more lighthearted, but the implications just continue to more serious levels.  I smiled, but then I realized that this root problem has major implications for the world, from simple friendships to wars and global relations.

Sometimes we shove problems aside because we don't have time to deal with them. We've all been there. Or we come up with a change—like buying bigger pants—that makes a problem like sneaky weight gain less uncomfortable, but as Mr. Money Mustache reminds us, this is really no cure.

A better solution, he suggests, is to actually stare your problems in the face and not mask them:

My solution is the opposite: put those damned tight pants on and keep wearing them. When they bite at you, it's a reminder to take the stairs instead of the elevator, eat a piece of grilled salmon instead of a chocolate bar and bologna sandwich, and to start walking and biking more. Those tight pants are your biggest ally in addressing the underlying problem – if you give them up, you'll be allowed to forget what the real problem is: your lifestyle has become unhealthy and you're doing everything with a dull saw!

From tight jeans to civil rights to wars, being truthful to ourselves and overcoming our obstacles is what makes us better people.  Whether we try to be better or let ourselves drift and go along is what defines us.

I'll Take A D, Pat

D stands for drunk.

It appears Pat Sajak and Vanna White were tipsy on more than one episode of Wheel of Fortune.  Everyone is pretending to be shocked and appalled, but I am taking the "meh, whatever" approach.  It's Wheel of Fortune, not brain surgery.  If we couldn't tell, and Vanna never flipped the wrong letter (I mean, they lit them up for her, for Pete's sake!) then who really cares? Except that they may need treatment for drinking problems, it's not our business.  And seriously, if you flipped the same letters for multiple decades, wouldn't you be tempted to have a liquid lunch as well?

Just my two cents.  I'm not shocked, but I do hope they are not suffering from anything worse than poor work ethic.

A Troubled Bridge Over Water, Part 3

Yet another bridge in Kentucky is damaged, this time by a transport ferry that hit the Eggner Ferry Bridge over Kentucky Lake on US 68 near the Tennessee border.

No one was injured after a supply vessel struck the Eggner Ferry Bridge in Western Kentucky Thursday night causing a central portion of the bridge to collapse, according to a Kentucky State Police dispatcher in Mayfield.

The incident happened about 9 p.m. and there were no cars near the collapsed portion of the bridge, Lt. Ron Easley, public affairs officer for the U.S. Coast Guard Ohio Valley Sector, said late Thursday night.


He said the the motor vessel Delta Marine, a 312-foot supply ship carrying empty rockets and space hardware, struck the main channel of the span. Easley was unsure if it was NASA equipment.

A cause is under investigation, Easley said, and the Coast Guard’s Marine Safety Unit as well as Kentucky Fish & Wildlife, the U.S. Forest Service and Marshall County emergency services were on the scene as of late Thursday night.


Kentucky Transportation Cabinet officials were also en route to the scene late Thursday, the state police dispatcher said.


Easley said the Coast Guard has set up a “safety zone” on the Tennessee River between mile markers 41 and 43 to keep non-emergency boats away from the area.

It's another nasty wreck, with reports that heavy fog last night and the fact the bridge had no lights on it contributed.  A bit of prevention might have saved the bridge from millions in damage, but putting safety lights on the bridge would have of course cost money (unlike fixing the thing with a massive hole in it now.)

Meanwhile Republicans are too busy cutting programs and Democrats are too busy giving tax breaks to arks.  Gotta love this state.

The Big GOP Debate Thread: Flori-duh

Naturally, the big topic at the final Florida GOP debate before Tuesday's primary was immigration, and all four candidates traded shots on the subject.

Early in the evening, Romney drew frequent applause when he pushed back attacks by Gingrich over immigration.

Gingrich called Romney the most anti-immigrant candidate on the debate stage, repeating a charge in a campaign ad Gingrich eventually pulled after a complaint it was unfair by Republican Sen. Marco Rubio.

Romney responded with outrage, accusing Gingrich of using "highly-charged epithets" irresponsibly and denying he wants to deport all of the nation's estimated 11 million illegal immigrants.

However, Gingrich and Santorum also agreed with Romney that at least some illegal immigrants would be likely to "self-deport" if the government were to crack down on employers who hired illegal immigrants. All three men advocated a system of identification for immigrants that would help employers verify an employee's legal status.

Ron Paul chimed in with much the same, that if businesses made the economic climate uncomfortable for undocumented immigrants, they'd leave.  In a state where the Latino voting population could make or break a candidate, all four of these clowns agreed that the chief role of government as far as immigration was concerned was to make life as miserable as possible for Latinos, even Ron Paul.

Not a one of them noted that enforcement under President Obama increased deportations much higher than under previous Presidents either, they were all too busy attacking the President's "weak" immigration policy.

On the issue of health care, Gingrich didn't have too much ammunition.  Rick Santorum saw his chance and took it.

After Romney described his health reforms and noted his pledge to repeal Obamacare, Santorum shot back that Romney said “government-run top down medicine is working well in Massachusetts and he supports it.”

“That’s not what I said,” Romney replied. But Santorum kept rolling.

“Think about what that means going up against Barack Obama, who you are going to claim, ‘well, it doesn’t work and we should repeal,’” he said. “He’s going to say, ‘Wait a minute, governor. You said it works well in Massachusetts.’ Folks — we can’t give this issue away in this election. It is about fundamental freedom.”


Almost confirming Santorum’s point, Romney responded by defending the aspects of his own law that were most directly reproduced in the Affordable Care Act: a mandate to require people to have insurance and a subsidized exchange in which individuals can choose between private health care plans.

“Rick, I make enough mistakes in what I said not for you to add more mistakes to what I said,” he began. “I didn’t say I’m in favor of top down government-run health care…If you don’t want to buy insurance, then you have to help pay for the cost of the state picking up your bill because under federal law if someone doesn’t have insurance, then we have to care for them in the hospitals, give them free care. We said no more free riders. We are insisting on personal responsibility.”

But given the fact that some 400,000 Floridians have already cast absentee ballots, the final debate may not have mattered much.  We'll see what happens on Tuesday.

StupidiNews!

• In the final day of his current campaign swing, President Obama will visit the University of Michigan to talk student loans and college debt.
• Secretary of State Hillary Clinton confirms she will step aside in a second Obama term, saying after two decades of public service that she's tired.
• Florida Republican Congressman David Rivera has reintroduced a modified DREAM Act, but only granting citizenship to members of the active military.
• Apple says it will not turn a blind eye to its supply chain problems, with reports of disturbing and dangerous labor conditions among plants in China.
• New scientific findings on the eyes of jumping spiders may help the world build better robots who can judge distances better.

Last Call

Reiuters conveniently gives the Republican party a way out of having to consider Sen. Marco Rubio for the Veepstakes later this year by noting of all things that like thousands of Floridians who are his constituents, Rubio is way, way underwater on his ritzy Miami mortgage.

In some ways, the story of Rubio's finances is similar to those of hundreds of thousands of his constituents in a state where more than 40 percent of homeowners are "underwater," owing more on their homes than the homes are worth.

It is a crisis driven by falling property values and ill-advised home equity loans that drove up homeowners' debts.

Rubio owes far more on his $384,000 Miami home than it is worth, and at times has had difficulty paying his mortgage.

He bought the home in 2005 for $550,000 with a $495,000 mortgage. He soon had it appraised for $735,000 and took out a home equity line of credit for $135,000.

In 2008, despite earning a declared $400,000 - including his $300,000 salary from the Miami law firm Broad and Cassel - Rubio failed to pay down the principal on his home for several months, according to Florida campaign finance disclosures.

During the same period he did not make payments on a $100,000-plus student loan from his days at the University of Miami, the disclosures said.

Rubio's spending habits also have gotten attention in Florida.

Before joining the Senate last year, he was caught up in an Internal Revenue Service investigation of the Florida Republican Party's use of party-issued credit cards. He frequently had used his party credit card for personal use, and later reimbursed the card company for about $16,000.

Rubio's handling of his personal finances contrasts sharply with the image of him on his Senate website, which highlights Rubio's efforts to prevent Washington from "piling up debt."

"We need a government that stops spending more money than it takes in," the website says.

Rubio's financial issues have led Florida Democrats to cast him as a hypocrite.

I'm honestly not sure whose neck Rubio would be a bigger anchor around:  Romney (who could pay off Rubio's debts with the collective change in his couch cushions in all of his many, many houses) or Gingrich (whose awful comments on Latinos "not understanding" wealth and entrepreneurship aren't exactly going to resolved by a guy who can't pay off his debts in a fiscally austere party of wackos.)

And that's before you factor in what race would mean to Republican voters with Rubio on the ticket.

On the other hand, counting anyone out when the party in question nominated Sarah Palin last time this happened is a huge mistake, frankly.  Guessing veeps at this point is an exercise in futility.  But I finally get to break out the Veeps tag again, huh.

Just The PolitiFacts, Ma'am

I tossed PolitiFact from this blog last month, and I'm glad to see others in the media finally getting sick of their "but we're a fact-check outfit that equivocates our judgment!" nonsense.  Rachel Maddow unloaded on them last night.

During the State of the Union address on Tuesday night, Obama stated: “In the last 22 months, businesses have created more than 3 million jobs. Last year, they created the most jobs since 2005.”

PolitiFact confirmed that both statistics were correct, only to rate Obama’s statement as “half true” on their Truth-O-Meter. The site said the statement was only half true because “he implicitly credited his administration.”

“PoiltiFact, what is wrong with you?” Maddow said. “You think the president calls himself ‘businesses?’ Like it is a nickname for himself?”

PolitiFact later revised its Truth-O-Meter rating to “Mostly True.”

“Mostly true? PolitiFact, you are fired,” Maddow said. “You are a mess. You are fired. You are undermining the definition of the word ‘fact’ in the English language by pretending to it in your name.”

Ouch.  But she's right.  It took a completely awful spin in order to make a TV news host cast them out of the temple, but it's done.  I hope that others follow suit pretty quickly.  PolitiFact trades solely on its credibility and reputation in keeping that credibility, and they failed that smell test months ago.

They're done, hopefully.  Maybe they'll be replaced by an actual fact checking outfit, other than the Washington Post's even worse Glenn Kessler.

Dirty Art (Totally Safe For Work)

Who would have thought dirty cars would be so pretty?  This article has some awesome examples, but I wanted to share my two favorites with you.  I'm not sure if Scott Wade, the artist featured here, is the same guy I have seen in the past, but I saw one "car dirt artist" chased and assaulted by the car owner, who didn't understand what was happening.





Because I like the unusual, if any of our readers know of some great and unique types of art, please share them!

Heroes, Heroes Everywhere!

An 85-year-old woman saved her husband by beating a moose with a shovel.

I know, it's cool.  Roll that around and digest it slowly.  You read it right.  She heard the dogs barking, and knew her husband was outside.  She originally thought the moose was charging her pets, it wasn't until she had grabbed a weapon and been charged herself that she saw her husband in the snow, seriously injured.  She is only five feet tall and doesn't weigh a hundred pounds, but she didn't waste a second when it came to defending those she loved.

Everybody survives, including the dogs.  It's a feel-good story that reminds us that older people aren't shells of faded youth.  They are capable of mighty impressive things, and have the wisdom to back up their instinct.

Oh Google, How Could You?

Google's decision to unite user information across services isn't surprising.  It makes good sense, actually.  Instead of having to manage several sub-accounts, users can set one group of rules and their favorite services will fall into line.  Preferences, privacy controls, even color schemes can unite.

What is a big deal, however, is that you can't opt out of this information use.  It's mandatory, and that sucks.  Not because my color schemes is a moral dilemma, but the fact that users have no choice in how the information is used sure is.  While I can understand the benefit of selling the merged accounts, in the end users should be able to maintain their privacy, if they are willing to deal with the inconvenience.

I do understand the logic that says Google has the right to run their services however they wish.  After all, we don't pay for them, so we don't have a lot of say in how the business is run.  However, like paying customers, we directly control their future success.  If Google can take our info, tell us it's just the law, and flourish... well, we've voted in our own way to accept it.

I will begrudgingly accept it, but the first cloud service to dare break the mold and honor its customers requests will come through this like a wrecking ball.  I can't wait.

Timmy's Tentative Tenure

Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner says that he doesn't believe President Obama will ask him to serve again in a second term.

“He’s not going to ask me to stay on, I’m pretty confident,” Geithner said in an interview with Bloomberg Television yesterday in Charlotte, North Carolina. “I’m confident he’ll be president. But I’m also confident he’s going to have the privilege of having another secretary of the Treasury.”

Geithner, 50, has led President Barack Obama’s efforts to pull the U.S. economy out of the worst recession since World War II, including overseeing bailouts of automakers General Motors Co. (GM) and Chrysler Group LLC, which have since emerged from bankruptcy. Before joining the administration in 2009, Geithner was president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, playing a key role in the government’s rescue packages for banks such as Citigroup Inc. (C) and Bank of America Corp. (BAC)
 
In the interview, Geithner said he would do “something else” after leaving the Treasury Department, without specifying what that would be. In August, an administration official said Geithner would stay in his job at least through this year’s presidential election.

Erskine Bowles, chief of staff under President Bill Clinton, and Democratic Senator Kent Conrad of North Dakota could be among the potential candidates to succeed Geithner, said Mark Calabria, director of financial regulation studies at the Cato Institute in Washington. 

I have to say I'd rather have Geithner over anyone the Cato Institute would mention.   Both of those meatballs would be as bad as Larry Summers on deficits and cutting the safety net.  If Geithner is replaced, he needs to be succeeded by someone who actually got the last 3 years plus right financially and economically, but that's just my opinion.

The Odious Primary

Back home, I see my good friend The Odious Patrick McHenry has drawn a particularly mean primary challenger in Ken Fortenberry, who's wasting no time in attacking McHenry ahead of May's primary in NC-10 over ethics and his whole "lapdog to the banks" act.

“When I asked Rep. Patrick McHenry last week why he would not co-sponsor the STOCK Act, a bill that would prohibit insider stock trading by members of Congress, he replied that the legislation was the creation of  ‘liberal Democrats’ and not worthy of his support,” Fortenberry said.

“Restoring the public’s trust in government has never been a priority for McHenry, who turns everything into a petty partisan battle,” he added. “This is one of the reasons Washington is broken and not working for the people, and why we need to clean House on Election Day.”

“Members of Congress should play by the same rules as all Americans,” Fortenberry asserted. “McHenry is dead-wrong in putting his friends above the people he is supposed to represent.”

When asked for comment on these allegations, Ryan Minto, who handles press for the congressman’s office, offered a statement from McHenry to the Times-News on Tuesday.

“While I personally don’t trade stocks, I understand the concern over this issue,” McHenry said. “The STOCK Act does not address holes in the existing insider-trading law, which may allow lawmakers to improperly enrich themselves. It would not, for example, address the troubling practice of access to exclusive IPOs by high-ranking members.

“Members of Congress should have to report all of their stock trades publicly in every instance — period,” McHenry added. “Increased disclosure will add transparency to help enforce the current insider-trading law, and anyone guilty of committing a crime should be prosecuted.”

In his release, Fortenberry additionally stated that ethics and honesty in government should not be viewed as a partisan issue.

Furthermore, he also said he would introduce legislation, if elected, that would prohibit members of Congress and Cabinet-level officials from lobbying for four years after they leave their positions, in addition to requiring them to fully disclose all of their personal finances during that time period.

“It’s bad enough that Mr. McHenry ignores the shenanigans of the big banks and securities firms, but it’s made even worse when he turns a blind eye to the corruption among his colleagues,” Fortenberry concluded.

It's damn impressive to see with as many bank employees in the Charlotte suburbs of NC-10 that the Republican is attacking McHenry on being too friendly with banks and stocks.   It's entirely true, of course.  But it's interesting seeing the Republican challenger pull a Ron Paul and go after McHenry on this angle in arguably one of the reddest districts in the country.

We'll see how it turns out.

StupidiNews!

• Fed chairman Ben Bernanke will keep interest rates low through the end of 2014 in order to assist the economy.
• New Jersey Governor Chris Christie drew the ire of Democrats and activists alike with his promise to veto any same sex marriage legislation.
• Solar storms are making this week's viewing of the Aurora Borealis in Alaska into something legendary as the sun enters a new cycle of activity.
• Netflix is back in the black after signing up more than 600,000 new customers in 4th quarter 2011, handily beating analysts' estimates.
• EU officials have proposed new electronic privacy rules that would give citizens the right to limit or delete information collected by businesses.